Phone Mast Home
 

The appeal by Orange against LBH's decision to refuse permission for their 3G mobile phone mast (base station) in Downham Road had been upheld by the Planning Inspectorate.

The letter is here

    - - - -

We've been alerted to the fact that Orange are appealing against last year's decision not to grant them a mobile phone mast at the junction of De Beauvoir Rd and Downham Rd. There is to be an appeal by Written Representation and you should send 3 copies of your comments by 29 June to The Planning Inspectorate, 3/23 Hawk Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN. For full details of the letter that has been received from the Planning Department, click here. 

You can request a free booklet, 'Guide to Taking Part in Planning Appeals'  from John Rowell, 8356 8291 or download it from

Orange's grounds for appeal are on our website here (small pdf file); anyone thinking of commenting needs to read it; the Planning Portal is supposed to have supporting documents but the website is a bit flaky. (Search tip: just enter the postcode N1 5AS in the search page.)

Here is the DBA's letter:

7 De Beauvoir Square

London N1 4LG

  

The Planning Inspectorate

3/23 Hawk Wing

Temple Quay House

2 The Square

Temple Quay

Bristol BS16PN

 

22 June 2006

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Re: Planning Appeal Ref. APP/U5360/A/06/2013019/NWF

 

I am writing on behalf of the De Beauvoir Association to object to the above planning appeal and to ask that it be rejected on the following grounds:

 

  1. People in the neighbourhood represented by the De Beauvoir Association are concerned about the negative impact that this mobile phone mast will have on the special character of our conservation area. This is an area of early nineteenth-century houses, generally of two, two and a half or three and a half storeys. We believe that a mobile phone mast is not appropriate in such an area and in this respect we refer you to Planning Policy Guidance note (PPG 8), which, I believe, specifically refers to proposed sites for mobile phone masts in relation to areas designated for their scenic or conservation value.
  2. People in this area are also very concerned about the possible effects of a mobile phone mast on their health. The location of the proposed mast in an area of dense residential occupation, in particular where there are a large number of children, is a matter of real concern.
  3. We are not aware that there is a need for a mobile phone mast in this area from the point of view of network coverage. Has the operator explored the possibility of sharing sites with existing masts or the use of alternative sites as they are required to do according to Planning Policy Guidance note (PPG 8)?
  4. The mobile phone company did not carry out any pre-application discussions with the De Beauvoir Association as I believe they were required to do. For this reason we were not given a proper opportunity to comment on the original application.

 

I trust that the above representations will be taken fully into account when this appeal is considered.

 

Kindly send me a copy of the Inspector's decision when it is available.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 
Hilary Mandleberg (Chair, De Beauvoir Association)